Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Can New Star Trek Movie Live up to the Review?

I was primarily interested in this review (copied below) of the newest Star Trek movie because A) as a young kid in the 60's I was a big fan of the original Star Trek (up to the second season, anyway), and B) I recently watched "Alias" for the first time on dvd, and the first season of writing with creator J.J. Abrams running the show was impressive -- he has an excellent sense of storytelling. (Season 2 of Alias isn't bad, but less good, season 3 and 4 - watchable, if contrived, and season 5 is so bad the show deserved to die a grisly death by then; Abrams left around season 3 after too much network meddling.)

Abram's is heavily involved in the new Star Trek movie. So, though I thought most of the Star Trek movies were junk ("Wrath of Khan" was relatively good) I wondered if the newest might be worth seeing. This is coming from a guy that now goes to less than one movie a year because I'm so fed up with sensory overload from too much CG and sensory underload from too much trashy storytelling.

So... though I am *always* deeply suspicious of reviews (most are worthless, aren't they? The reviewer is either on the take for the studio, or hates everything, including the movie and himself), this is easily the most glowing review I've *ever* read of a movie. Get a load of this:

One of the most refreshing – and surprising -- aspects is how elitist it is.

Throughout, there is great emphasis on the fact that the crew members are not everymen.

Each is a talented individual who has knuckled down to serious training and passing rigorous exams with the highest honours.

It is one of the few movies I have seen in recent years which has celebrated intellectual endeavour, the informed weighing up of risks, the taking of responsibility. It is, well nigh uniquely in modern Hollywood, grown-up.

Never read anything like this in a review. Ever. Is this guy an Ayn Rand fan? Read "The Romantic Manifesto", and you'll know what I'm talking about. We shall see if the movie lives up to the review...

The original cast had long gone, and the ideas had dried up. Why try to reanimate a corpse?

The short answer is that J.J. Abrams had come up with a tremendous idea, inspired no doubt by the success of Batman Begins and Casino Royale, both of which had reinvigorated tired franchises by recasting and going back to basics.

The result is not only by far the best of the 11 Star Trek movies, it must rank as the outstanding prequel of all time.

For those too young to remember the original TV series and its spin-off movies, or (like me) unconvinced that they were in all respects works of untrammelled genius, the movie ticks all the boxes as regards big set pieces.

We see space battles, planets sucked into black holes, chases, space aliens. Stupendous special effects and a magnificent score by Michael Giacchino make it a treat for the eyes and ears.

The picture moves at a terrific pace, and is a satisfying tale of good versus evil, with Eric Bana a highly hissable villain.

He’s the Romulan Nero, bent on avenging the destruction of his planet by blowing up first Vulcan, and then Earth.

The Australian actor is virtually unrecognisable in the role, and confirms my suspicion that, though he struggles to carry a movie as a leading man (proved most notably in Hulk), he is a first-rate character actor.

Star Trek

Like all the best villains, Nero is driven by a belief that he is in the right, and makes a fearsome adversary.

The script feels remarkably fresh, no small achievement in itself, and takes an ingenious turn with the introduction of a time travel theme, and a highly effective reappearance of 78-year-old Leonard Nimoy, who was of course the original Spock and brings considerable dignity and grace to his scenes, which are far more than cameos.

This is space opera on a mythic scale, and it’s stirring stuff.

The immense grandeur of the imagery bodes well for anyone who chooses, in the wake of this movie’s inevitable success, to go back into the history of the franchise, and marry some of its better script ideas to 21st century technology.

Freefall: Olsen, Sulu and Kirk plummet towards the ground... but will they all survive?

After the artistic disappointment of George Lucas’s Star Wars prequels, with its terrible dialogue and worse acting, this movie really does promise a creative re-birth of science fiction adventure.

The revelation for many will be the way the screenplay honours the original characters created by Gene Roddenberry in the sixties, and gives them a moving and satisfying back-story.

Rightly, it centres on the initial dislike and rivalry, followed by respect and friendship, of the all-American, Hell-raising space rookie James Tiberius Kirk (played with real dash and charisma by Chris Pine), and the austere, apparently unemotional half-human, half-Vulcan Spock (a remarkably subtle and touching performance by Zachary Quinto).

We also get to see the formation of the rest of the crew of the USS Enterprise, and they’re all splendidly played with real affection and understanding of the TV originals.

A dramatic moment for Kirk in the film, which also features spectacular skydiving from space sequences

The attractive Zoe Saldana is strong and sympathetic as the language expert, Uhura.

Simon Pegg provides late comic relief as Scotty, who becomes the chief engineer. Other, minor members of the crew also get their chance to shine.

Fans of the original series will not be disappointed. Throughout, there’s just the right degree of reverence for the original, coupled with an attractive ability to poke fun at it.

For anyone who grew up with Star Trek, there’s terrific resonance in the first time Kirk sits in the captain’s seat on the USS Enterprise – and is abruptly ordered out of it – and satisfaction in watching the various characters and ingredients drop into place. It’s an emotional experience.

New beginning: Fans will see the birth of Kirk in the prequel

One of the most refreshing – and surprising - aspects is how elitist it is.

Throughout, there is great emphasis on the fact that the crew members are not everymen.

Each is a talented individual who has knuckled down to serious training and passing rigorous exams with the highest honours.

It is one of the few movies I have seen in recent years which has celebrated intellectual endeavour, the informed weighing up of risks, the taking of responsibility. It is, well nigh uniquely in modern Hollywood, grown-up.

It’s easy to remember which of the original Star Trek movies were good.

The even-numbered ones were all fun, with numbers VI and VIII the best of the lot, until they reached Star Trek X, which was dreadful. The odd-numbered ones were pretty boring.

Hold on: Starfleet cadet Kirk hangs on to the platform after his skydive

At its worst, the franchise got bogged down in impenetrable jargon and pretentious ideas ponderously expressed.

It started way back in 1966, and by the time the films came along in 1979, many of the original cast were long in the tooth.

When Lieutenant Uhura performed the dance of the seven veils in Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989), she looked as though she was taking part in a glamorous granny competition, and some male members of the cast acted as though they had been semi-embalmed by a negligent mortician.

Twenty years on, I predict that we are about to see an explosion of interest in the original series.

And, on this evidence, a young and dynamic cast of actors are set to boldly go where no other movie series has gone before: into a new series of Star Trek stories with a prodigious new lease of life. Welcome back, you Trekkers.

1 comment:

Comments must be polite and well-reasoned, but passion is allowed when directed at the subject matter and not someone who posts -- violate this, and your comment doesn't get posted. Comments may not post immediately -- I'm pretty busy and don't live on the web.